DOCSLIB.ORG

Publication 14. Geological Series 11. the OCCURRENCE of OIL AND

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Publication 14. Geological Series 11. the OCCURRENCE of OIL AND STATE OF MICHIGAN CHAPTER II. GEOLOGICAL FACTORS MICHIGAN GEOLOGICAL AND BIOLOGICAL SURVEY CONTROLLING THE OCCURRENCE OF OIL AND GAS. ................................................................................12 Publication 14. Geological Series 11. THE ANTICLINAL THEORY. .......................................12 THE OCCURRENCE OF OIL AND GAS IN ROCK PRESSURE IN GAS AND OIL WELLS............17 MICHIGAN Cause of Rock Pressure........................................ 17 SURFACE INDICATIONS............................................19 By Richard A. Smith CHAPTER III. THE PORT HURON FIELD. ...................19 Published as a part of the Annual Report of the Board of EARLY HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT. ..................19 Geological and Biological Survey for 1912. GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS IN WESTERN ONTARIO.....................................................................20 Lansing, Michigan The Petrolia Field .................................................. 21 Wynkoop Hallenbeck Crawford Co., State Printers Sarnia Township.................................................... 21 1914 Courtright............................................................... 22 EXPLORATIONS IN THE PORT HURON FIELD........22 Port Huron ............................................................. 22 Contents Marysville............................................................... 23 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL............................................ 2 Wadham's Station.................................................. 24 Abbotsford ............................................................. 24 INTRODUCTION............................................................... 4 Valley Center ......................................................... 24 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................ 5 Imlay City............................................................... 24 CHAPTER I. THE MICHIGAN BASIN. ............................ 5 Fort Gratiot Township............................................ 25 THE PORT HURON ANTICLINE.................................25 MAJOR STRUCTURE................................................... 5 THE OIL HORIZONS. ..................................................25 MINOR STRUCTURES................................................. 6 Conclusions ........................................................... 25 THE GEOLOGICAL SECTION...................................... 6 HURON AND SANILAC COUNTIES. ..........................25 CAMBRIAN. .............................................................6 The early salt wells ................................................ 25 Lake Superior, Eastern or Jacobsville sandstone.........6 The Geological Sections........................................ 26 ORDOVICIAN. .........................................................7 Calciferous, Lower Magnesian .....................................7 CHAPTER IV. THE SOUTHEASTERN DISTRICT. .......26 St. Peters......................................................................7 INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. ................................26 Trenton Limestone .......................................................7 Utica Shale ...................................................................7 ROCK STRUCTURES. ................................................26 Lorraine or Maysville ....................................................7 RELATION OF SURFACE SIGNS TO OIL AND GAS SILURIAN. ...............................................................8 HORIZONS. .................................................................26 Richmond and Medina .................................................8 MONROE COUNTY.....................................................27 Clinton ..........................................................................8 Monroe................................................................... 27 Rochester Shale...........................................................8 Strasburg ............................................................... 28 The Niagara Limestone. (Guelph and Lockport.).........8 Salina ...........................................................................8 Milan ...................................................................... 29 Monroe Formation ........................................................9 Newport ................................................................. 30 Lower Monroe or Bass Island Series.....................9 Ida.......................................................................... 30 Sylvania. Middle Monroe .......................................9 Riga ....................................................................... 30 Upper Monroe or Detroit River Series ...................9 South Rockwood ................................................... 30 DEVONIAN. .............................................................9 LENAWEE COUNTY. ..................................................30 Dundee (Corniferous) limestone...................................9 Adrian .................................................................... 30 Traverse (Hamilton and Marcellus) Formation .............9 Britton .................................................................... 31 Antrim Shale...............................................................10 Blissfield................................................................. 31 MISSISSIPPIAN.....................................................10 Berea Sandstone........................................................10 Manchester............................................................ 31 Coldwater Shale .........................................................10 Madison Township................................................. 31 Marshall Sandstone. Napoleon or Upper Marshall and HILLSDALE COUNTY..................................................32 Lower Marshall ...........................................................10 Hillsdale ................................................................. 32 Michigan Series or Lower Grand Rapids....................11 Osseo .................................................................... 32 Bay Port Limestone or Maxville. Upper Grand Rapids WAYNE COUNTY........................................................32 ...................................................................................11 PENNSYLVANIAN.................................................11 Trenton .................................................................. 32 Parma Sandstone or Conglomerate ...........................11 Grosse Isle ............................................................ 33 Saginaw Formation ....................................................11 Romulus Township ................................................ 33 POSSIBLY PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS. .............11 Wyandotte ............................................................. 34 Woodville....................................................................11 Delray .................................................................... 34 PLEISTOCENE......................................................12 River Rouge........................................................... 34 Publication 14, Geological Series 11 / Chapters 1-5– Page 1 of 49 Oakwood................................................................34 Illustrations Fort Wayne ............................................................36 Detroit ....................................................................37 North Detroit...........................................................37 Plates Eloise .....................................................................37 Plate I. Pumping plant of the Michigan Development LOCAL STRUCTURES IN SOUTHEASTERN Company, Port Huron. ...................................................22 MICHIGAN................................................................... 37 Plate II. The Garey-Casamer No. 1 Well, Saginaw. ..............44 Wyandotte Anticline ...............................................37 Stony Island Anticline.............................................38 WASHTENAW COUNTY............................................. 38 Figures Ypsilanti .................................................................38 Figure 1. Diagrammatic cross section of the Michigan Basin Ann Arbor...............................................................38 from Port Rowan, Ontario to Manistee, Michigan.............6 OAKLAND COUNTY. .................................................. 39 Figure 2. Outline geological map of Michigan showing Royal Oak ..............................................................39 Paleozoic formations and the location of deep borings. ...7 Mutual Oil & Gas Company's Well, Royal Oak......39 Pontiac ...................................................................39 Figure 3. Geological column of Michigan from the Calciferous to the Pleistocene (by A. C. Lane)....................................8 South Lyon.............................................................40 MACOMB COUNTY. ................................................... 40 Figure 4. Diagrammatic section of reservoirs showing ideal Mt. Clemens...........................................................40 relations of oil, gas, and water........................................15 New Baltimore........................................................40 Figure 5. Diagrammatic section of the oil and gas sands in the Romeo ...................................................................40 central Appalachian oil region.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fractured Shale Gas Potential in New York
    FRACTURED SHALE GAS POTENTIAL IN NEW YORK David G. HILL and Tracy E. LOMBARDI TICORA Geosciences, Inc., Arvada, Colorado, USA John P. MARTIN New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, Albany, New York, USA ABSTRACT In 1821, a shallow well drilled in the Devonian age shale ushered in a new era for the United States when natural gas was produced, transported and sold to local establishments in the town of Fredonia, New York. Following this discovery, hundreds of shallow shale wells were drilled along the Lake Erie shoreline and eventually several shale gas fields were established southeastward from the lake in the late 1800’s. Since the mid 1900’s, approximately 100 wells have been drilled in New York to test the fractured shale potential of the Devonian and Silurian age shales. With so few wells drilled over the past century, the true potential of fractured shale reservoirs has not been thoroughly assessed, and there may be a substantial resource. While the resource for shale gas in New York is large, ranging from 163-313 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) and the history of production dates back over 180 years, it has not been a major contributor to natural gas production in New York. A review of the history and research conducted on the shales shows that the resource in New York is poorly understood and has not been adequately tested. Other shales such as the Silurian and Ordovician Utica Shale may also hold promise as new commercial shale gas reservoirs. Experience developing shale gas plays in the past 20 years has demonstrated that every shale play is unique.
    [Show full text]
  • State Ge?Logical Survey
    ILLINOIS State Ge?logical Survey BULLETIN NO. 1. THE GEOLOGICAL MAP OF ILLINOIS BY STUART WELLER. URBANA: UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS. 1906. SPRINGFIELD: lLLI:\'OIS STATE JOURNAL Co., STATE PRINTBRs· 1 9 0 6 ., STATE GEOLOGICAL COMMISSION GOVERNOR C. S. DENEEN, Chairman, PROFESSOR T. C. CHAMBERLIN, V·ice-Oha·irman. PRESIDENT EDMUND J. JAMES Secretary. H. FOSTER BAIN, Director. ·1 CONTENTS. PAGE. Letter of transmittal.... .. .. .. ..... ..... ...... .. ... ......... .. .. .... Introduction .................................................................... ..... 8 Purpose of a geological map.............................. ............................... 8 Sources of material . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ........ .... 8 Lines of deformation .............................. ........................ 11 Geological formations represented ................................ rn Cambrian........................ ........ ..... .. 13 Potsdam sandstone .. ...... ...................... 1:J Ordovician ............................................... ........................... ...... 14 Lower Magnesian limestone.......................... ... ........ 14 St. Peters sandstone . ... .... .... .. .. ..... ..... ...... .. ... ... H Trenton-Galena formation ............................................ ............... 1r:i Cincinnatian formation.... .. ...... .. .. .. .. ...... .. .... 16 Silurian ......... ...... .... .. .... ....... .... ............ ........ .... .. ...... .... .. .... ...... 17 N iag-aran limestone.... .. .. .. .. .. ... ........ ... 17 Devonian..............................
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Multiple Trackways of Protichnites Owen, 1852, from the Potsdam Sandstone (Late Cambrian), St
    AN ANALYSIS OF MULTIPLE TRACKWAYS OF PROTICHNITES OWEN, 1852, FROM THE POTSDAM SANDSTONE (LATE CAMBRIAN), ST. LAWRENCE VALLEY, NY by Matthew E. Burton-Kelly A Bachelors Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the Department of Geology of St. Lawrence University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science with Honors in Geology Canton, New York 2005 1 2 3 This thesis submitted by in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science with Honors in Geology from St. Lawrence University is hereby approved by the Faculty Advisor under whom the work was done. Faculty Advisor Date Department Chairman Date ii 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank Dr. J. Mark Erickson for his assistance and guidance throughout the course of this project, as well as the St. Lawrence University Geology Department, which provided research materials and covered transportation costs. Attendance at the annual meeting of the Northeastern Section of the Geological Society of America to present preliminary results was funded by the Jim Street Fund, St. Lawrence University Geology. Jim Dawson provided vital insight into the nature of these trackways. Any number of additional people provided support for the author, most notably Camille Partin, Trisha Smrecak, and Joanne Cavallerano, but thanks go out to all the members of the St. Lawrence University Geology Department and the St. Lawrence University Track and Field teams. iii 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS THESIS APPROVAL..........................................................................................................ii
    [Show full text]
  • GEOLOGIC SUMMARY of the APPALACHIAN BASIN, with REFERENCE to the SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL of RADIOACTIVE WASTE SOLUTIONS by George W
    TEI-791 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY" GEOLOGIC SUMMARY OF THE APPALACHIAN BASIN, WITH;REFERENCE TO THE SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE SOLUTIONS* By George W. Colton June 1961 Report TEI-791 This report is preliminary and ha^;not been edited for conformity with G^logical Survey format and nomenclature. ?1 ^Prepared on behalf of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. CONTENTS Abstract* .......................... 5 Introduction. ........................ 7 Purpose of report. ................... 7 Organization of report .................. 7 Location and extent of area. .............. Q Acknowledgments. .................... 10 Geologic framework. ..................... 10 Depositional framework ................. 10 Structural framework .................. llj. Stratigraphy. ........................ 17 Late Precambrian stratified sequence .......... 17 Early Cambrian clastic sequence. ............ 18 Thickness and depth ................ 22 Cambrian-Ordovician carbonate sequence ......... 23 Thickness and depth . , ........... 35 Late Ordovician clastic sequence ............ 35 Thickness and depth ................ Mi- Early Silurian clastic sequence. ............ kk Thickness and depth ................ 51 Silurian-Devonian carbonate sequence .......... 52 Thickness and depth ................ 62 Devonian classic sequence. ............... 63 Thickness and depth ................ 69 Mississippian sequence ................. 70 Thickness and depth ................ 79 Pennsylvanian sequence ................. 79 Waste
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanical Properties of St. Peter Sandstone a Comparison of Field and Laboratory Results a Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of T
    MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ST. PETER SANDSTONE A COMPARISON OF FIELD AND LABORATORY RESULTS A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY MICHAEL EUGENE DITTES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE DECEMBER, 2015 This thesis contains previously published material (Appendix E) in the “Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering” © 2002 ASCE. All other material © 2015 Michael E. Dittes All Rights Reserved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to extend my thanks to those, who without their help I would not have been able to bring this project to completion. First and foremost, I thank Professor Joseph Labuz who took a chance on me, by offering me a TA-ship. Through my time in school, Joe helped me stay focused when I started to move off on tangents, offered timely advice, and over the years has become much more than my advisor. I am proud to think of him as a friend. Professors Andrew Drescher and Peter Huddleston also deserve special thanks for providing critical review of my work, and agreeing to sit on my thesis committee. To Ms. Tiffany Ralston who had an uncanny way of knowing what I needed to do, and how, before I knew myself. To Charles Nelson who helped me streamline my thesis project and helped me gain access to the Minnesota Library Archives construction site. To my fellow graduate students with whom I debated, joked and laughed, you helped me see things that I was missing. Your input was invaluable and you have my deep appreciation.
    [Show full text]
  • Lexington Quadrangle Virginia
    COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF MINERAL RESOURCES GEOLOGY OF THE LEXINGTON QUADRANGLE VIRGINIA KENNETH F. BICK REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS I VIRGINIA DIVISION OF MINERAL RESOURCES Jomes L. Colver Commissioner of Minerol Resources ond Stote Geologist CHARLOTTESVI LLE, VI RGI N IA 1960 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF MINERAL RESOURCES GEOLOGY OF THE LEXINGTON QUADRANGLE VIRGINIA KENNETH F. BICK REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS I VIRGINIA DIVISION OF MINERAL RESOURCES Jomes L. Colver Commissioner of Minerol Resources ond Stote Geologist CHARLOTTESVI LLE, VI RGI N IA 1960 Couuowwoer,rn op Vtncrwre DopenrupNr op Puncnesrs exo Supptv Rrculroxn 1960 DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Richmond. Virginia MenvrN M. SurHnnr,eNn, Director BOARD Vrcron W. Stnwenr, Petersburg, Chairtnan G. Ar,vrn MessnNnunc, Hampton, Viee'Chairman A. Pr,urvrnr BmnNn, Orange C. S. Cenrnn, Bristol ANpnpw A. Fenr,pv, Danville WonrnrrvcroN FauLKNEn, Glasgow SvoNpv F. Slter,r,, Roanoke EnwrN H. Wrr,r,, Richmond Wrr,r,renr P. Wooor,nv. Norfolk CONTENTS Pece Abstract. '"*i"#:;;;;: . : ::: , : ::.:::::::::..::::::. :.::.::::::: ::,r Z Geography 8 Purpose. 4 Previous Work. Present Work and Acknowledgements. 5 Geologic Formations. 6 Introduction. 6 Precambrian System. 6 Pedlar formation 6 Precambrian and Cambrian Systems. 6 Discussion. 6 Swift Run formation 8 Catoctin greenstone. I Unieoiformation...... ......... I Hampton(Harpers)formation. .......... I Erwin (Antietam) quartzite. Cambrian System . I0 Shady (Tomstown) dolomite 10 Rome (Waynesboro) formation.... ll Elbrook formation. 12 Conococheague limestone. l3 Ordovician System. ......., 14 Chepultepeclimestone. .......... 14 Beekmantown formatron. 14 New Market limestone. 15 Lincolnshire limestone. 16 Edinburg formation. 16 Martinsburg shale... 17 SilurianSystem. ......... 18 Clinchsandstone..... .......... 18 Clinton formation.
    [Show full text]
  • Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana
    Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 348 Carboniferous Formations and Faunas of Central Montana By W. H. EASTON GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 348 A study of the stratigraphic and ecologic associa­ tions and significance offossils from the Big Snowy group of Mississippian and Pennsylvanian rocks UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1962 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library has cataloged this publication as follows : Eastern, William Heyden, 1916- Carboniferous formations and faunas of central Montana. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1961. iv, 126 p. illus., diagrs., tables. 29 cm. (U.S. Geological Survey. Professional paper 348) Part of illustrative matter folded in pocket. Bibliography: p. 101-108. 1. Paleontology Montana. 2. Paleontology Carboniferous. 3. Geology, Stratigraphic Carboniferous. I. Title. (Series) For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, B.C. CONTENTS Page Page Abstract-__________________________________________ 1 Faunal analysis Continued Introduction _______________________________________ 1 Faunal relations ______________________________ 22 Purposes of the study_ __________________________ 1 Long-ranging elements...__________________ 22 Organization of present work___ __________________ 3 Elements of Mississippian affinity.._________ 22 Acknowledgments--.-------.- ___________________
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphic Framework of Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in The
    Stratigraphic Framework of Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in the Central Appalachian Basin from Medina County, Ohio, through Southwestern and South-Central Pennsylvania to Hampshire County, West Virginia U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1839-K Chapter K Stratigraphic Framework of Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in the Central Appalachian Basin from Medina County, Ohio, through Southwestern and South-Central Pennsylvania to Hampshire County, West Virginia By ROBERT T. RYDER, ANITA G. HARRIS, and JOHN E. REPETSKI Stratigraphic framework of the Cambrian and Ordovician sequence in part of the central Appalachian basin and the structure of underlying block-faulted basement rocks U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1839 EVOLUTION OF SEDIMENTARY BASINS-APPALACHIAN BASIN U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 For sale by Book and Open-File Report Sales U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25286 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Ryder, Robert T. Stratigraphic framework of Cambrian and Ordovician rocks in the central Appalachian Basin from Medina County, Ohio, through southwestern and south-central Pennsylvania to Hampshire County, West Virginia / by Robert T. Ryder, Anita C. Harris, and John E. Repetski. p. cm. (Evolution of sedimentary basins Appalachian Basin ; ch. K) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1839-K) Includes bibliographical references. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1839-K 1. Geology, Stratigraphic Cambrian.
    [Show full text]
  • Paleozoic Rocks Antelope Valley Eureka and Nye Counties Nevada
    :It k 'I! ' Paleozoic Rocks Antelope Valley Eureka and Nye Counties Nevada GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 423 Paleozoic Rocks of Antelope Valley Eureka and Nye Counties Nevada By CHARLES W. MERRIAM GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 423 P,rinciples of stratigraphy applied in descriptive study of the Central Great Basin Paleozoic column UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Page Silurian system ____________________________________ _ Abstract------------------------------------------- 1 36 Introduction. _____________________________________ _ 2 General features-------------------------------- 36 Geologic setting ______________ ------ ___ --------- 2 Roberts Mountains formation ___________________ _ 37 History of investigation ________________________ _ 5 Lone Mountain dolomite ______ ---_-------------- 39 Purpose and scope _____________ -- ______ ------ --- 6 Devonian system ______________ ---- __ - _- ___ - _------- 41 Acknowledgments ______________________________ _ 6 General features _____________ - ___________ -_----- 41 Geologic structure as related to stratigraphy __________ _ 6 Western Helderberg age limestones of the Monitor Paleontologic studies ______ ..:. _______ ~ ________________ _ 9 · Range ______ - _.- ___ --------------------------- 42 The Paleozoic column at Antelope Valley
    [Show full text]
  • Brachiopods from the Mobarak Formation, North Iran
    GeoArabia, 2011, v. 16, no. 3, p. 129-192 Gulf PetroLink, Bahrain Tournaisian (Mississippian) brachiopods from the Mobarak Formation, North Iran Maryamnaz Bahrammanesh, Lucia Angiolini, Anselmo Alessandro Antonelli, Babak Aghababalou and Maurizio Gaetani ABSTRACT Following detailed stratigraphic work on the Mississippian marlstone and bioclastic limestone of the Mobarak Formation of the Alborz Mountains in North Iran, forty-eight of the most important brachiopod taxa are here systematically described and illustrated. The ranges of the taxa are given along the Abrendan and Simeh Kuh stratigraphic sections, located north of Damgham. The examined brachiopod species date the base of the Mobarak Formation to the Tournaisian, in absence of age-diagnostic foraminifers. Change in brachiopod settling preferences indicates a shift from high energy, shallow-water settings with high nutrient supply in the lower part of the formation to quieter, soft, but not soppy substrates, with lower nutrient supply in the middle part of the Mobarak Formation. Brachiopod occurrence is instead scanty at its top. The palaeobiogeographic affinity of the Tournaisian brachiopods from North Iran indicates a closer relationship to North America, Western Europe and the Russian Platform than to cold-water Australian faunas, confirming the affinity of the other biota of the Alborz Mountains. This can be explained by the occurrence of warm surface-current gyres widely distributing brachiopod larvae across the Palaeotethys Ocean, where North Iran as other peri- Gondwanan blocks acted as staging-posts. INTRODUCTION The Mississippian Mobarak Formation of the Alborz Mountains (North Iran) has been recently revised by Brenckle et al. (2009) who focused mainly on its calcareous microfossil biota and refined its biostratigraphy, chronostratigraphy and paleogeography.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Information Maxville Lime.Stone
    .·-~ . f GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF OHIO WILBER STOUT, State Geologist Fourth Series Information Circular No. 3 RECENT INFORMATION ON THE MAXVILLE LIME.STONE by RAYMONDE. LAMBORN COLUMBUS 1945 Reprinted 1961 HOOK I\(..• OHIO GEOL. SURVEY. LAKE ERIE SECTION LIBRARY CARD NO. ·7 STATE CF OHIO Michael V. DiSalle Governor DEPARTMENT CF NATURAL RESOURCES Herbert B. Eagon Director NATURAL RESOURCES CCMMISSION C. D. Blubaugh Joseph E. Hunt Herbert B. Eagon Roy M. Kottman Byron Frederick DemClB L. Sean Forrest G. Hl1ll Myron T. Sturgeon Willian• Hoyne DIVISION OF GEQ.OGICAL SURVEY Ralph j. Bernhagen Chief COLUMBUS 1945 Reprinted 1961 Heer ptg. Co., Cols., O. INTRODUCTION The Maxville has been an important source of limestone for more than 100 years in southern and east central Ohio where it was first utilized for mortar and for furnace flux. Probably for this rea~on outcrops of a limestone later shown to be Maxville in age were described by Briggs in 1838 who noted occurrences near Maxville, Perry County; on Three Mile Run near Logan in Hocking County; near Reeds Mills near Wellston, Jackson County; and at the Canter Quarry in Hamilton Township, Jack- son County.1 Further obser.vations of this limestone were made by E. B. Andrews of the Second Geological Survey of Ohio and his report was published in the Report of Progress in 1869. Andrews named the lime- stone the Maxville for its occurrence near Maxville, Hocking County, noted its patchy distribution on the outcrop, described its stratigraphic position as immediately overlying the Logan sandstones ana shales, and declared the limestone to be of sub-Carboniferous (Mississippian) age.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1839-G, H
    Stratigraphic Framework of Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in the Central Appalachian Basin from Morrow County, Ohio, to Pendleton County, West Virginia Depositional Environment of the Fincastle Conglomerate near Roanoke, Virginia U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1839-G, H i i i I ' i ' i ' X- »-v l^,:^ Stratigraphic Framework of Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in the Central Appalachian Basin from Morrow County, Ohio, to Pendleton County, West Virginia By ROBERT T. RYDER Depositional Environment of the Fincastle Conglomerate near Roanoke, Virginia By CHRYSA M. CULLATHER Chapters G and H are issued as a single volume and are not available separately U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1839-G, H EVOLUTION OF SEDIMENTARY BASINS-APPALACHIAN BASIN U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, Jr., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DALLAS L. PECK, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 For sale by Book and Open-File Report Sales U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center, Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data (revised for vol. G-H) Evoluation of sedimentary basins Appalachian basin. (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1839 A-D, G-H) Includes bibliographies. Supt. of Docs. no.:19.3:1839-G Contents: Horses in fensters of the Pulaski thrust sheet, southwestern Virginia / by Arthur P. Schultz [etc.] Stratigraphic framework of Cam­ brian and Ordovician rocks in central Appalachian basin from Morrow County, Ohio, to Pendleton County, West Virginia / by Robert T.
    [Show full text]